Front Row review

Excellent — 5 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 20% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 12 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 7 · Strong 3 · Adequate 1 · Weak 1. The typical agency here scores Excellent, and none scores higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Measures profitable revenue, contribution margin, TACoS, new-to-brand, and organic halo—not sales or ROAS alone.

Scores low — Verified margin-aware growth scores 4-5; gross-sales vanity scores 1-2.

What we found — Named cases describe Amazon and DTC growth, though profit definitions and independent verification are limited.

On the record — “The cases describe building Amazon presence and using educational content to support conversion for named consumer brands.” frontrowgroup.com ↗

ROAS — return on ad spend: revenue per dollar of advertising. Platform-reported ROAS overstates; independently measured ROAS is the honest version.

DTC — direct-to-consumer: brands selling on their own site rather than through retailers.

Evidence: vendor stated — the agency’s own claim, recorded as theirs rather than ours.

Excellent — 5 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 15% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 12 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 5 · Strong 7. The typical agency here scores Strong, and none scores higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Deep skill in Sponsored Products/Brands/Display, DSP, AMC, Walmart Connect, Instacart, or relevant networks.

Scores low — Hands-on platform depth scores 4-5; generic PPC repackaged for Amazon scores 1-2.

What we found — Marketplace growth and broader retail-media capabilities are integrated in the group offer.

Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.

Excellent — 5 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 15% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 12 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 6 · Strong 5 · Adequate 1. The typical agency here scores Excellent, and none scores higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Owns keyword strategy, titles, bullets, A+ content, imagery/video, storefronts, testing, and review-safe conversion work.

Scores high — Measured listing lift scores 4-5.

What we found — Cases show educational content, brand presentation, and marketplace conversion work.

On the record — “The cases describe building Amazon presence and using educational content to support conversion for named consumer brands.” frontrowgroup.com ↗

Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.

Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 14% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 12 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 3 · Strong 7 · Weak 1 · Poor 1. The typical agency here scores Strong, and 3 of them score higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Understands Buy Box, FBA/FBM, forecasting, stockouts, fees, suppressions, Brand Registry, unauthorized sellers, and account health.

Scores low — Integrated operational judgment scores 4-5; ad-only tunnel vision scores 1-2.

What we found — Marketplace partnership delivery is broad, but inventory and suspension SLAs are not public.

Evidence: vendor stated — the agency’s own claim, recorded as theirs rather than ours.

Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 12% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 12 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 2 · Strong 7 · Adequate 2 · Weak 1. The typical agency here scores Strong, and 2 of them score higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Uses AMC, clean rooms, holdouts, new-to-brand, blended economics, and cross-channel measurement.

Scores low — Platform-attributed ROAS as the sole truth scores 1-2.

What we found — Growth outcomes are published, while holdout and incrementality methods are not.

ROAS — return on ad spend: revenue per dollar of advertising. Platform-reported ROAS overstates; independently measured ROAS is the honest version.

Evidence: vendor stated — the agency’s own claim, recorded as theirs rather than ours.

Excellent — 5 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 8% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 12 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 8 · Strong 4. The typical agency here scores Excellent, and none scores higher than this one.

Scores high — Named results in the buyer's marketplace, geography, product category, price point, and maturity score 4-5.

Scores low — One-size-fits-all marketplace claims score 2.

What we found — Amazon marketplace growth is a named capability with a dedicated case collection. That is the high band above, which is why it scored Excellent.

On the record — “Front Row publishes a dedicated Amazon marketplace growth case collection for brands seeking marketplace and DTC expansion.” frontrowgroup.com ↗

Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.

Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 10% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 12 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 3 · Strong 6 · Adequate 2 · Poor 1. The typical agency here scores Strong, and 3 of them score higher than this one.

Scores high — Recent named cases plus verified reviews with sales, margin, TACoS, conversion, or operational outcomes score 4-5.

Scores low — Vendor claims without references score 1-2.

What we found — The case library names recognizable brands, but independent service-review depth is limited. That is the high band above, which is why it scored Strong.

Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.

Not disclosed — 2 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). Nothing was published about this, so it scores at the bottom of the scale — that is a finding about what the agency discloses, not about the quality of its work. This dimension carries 6% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 12 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Strong 3 · Adequate 3 · Weak 5 · Poor 1. The typical agency here scores Adequate, and 6 of them score higher than this one.

Scores high — Clear retainer/revenue-share terms, disclosed media or reseller markups, client-owned marketplace/ad accounts, asset ownership, and short exits score 4-5.

Scores low — Seller-account control or opaque percentage fees score 1.

What we found — No useful public pricing, account-access, or ownership terms were located. That is what the low band describes, and nothing published resolves it.

retainer — a fixed monthly fee regardless of hours or output — predictable, but worth tying to a defined scope.

Evidence: unknown

Stronger here: Sequence Commerce scores Strong on the same dimension.